Thanks for the Advice and i will do so. Don't think prices will drop here in South Africa as the chip has not been available as yetQuote:
Originally Posted by gOtVoltage
Thanks for the Advice and i will do so. Don't think prices will drop here in South Africa as the chip has not been available as yetQuote:
Originally Posted by gOtVoltage
Even at stock clocks, I'm still getting an average of 55fps with the FX6100. So there is no need to have it clocked above 4.6Ghz for gaming. It does just fine in my opinion!
Unless you really gotta have 1000fps which you can't see anyhow, I don't see what the problem is..
Well heard today that the 81xx delayed again possibly till New Year so i gonna go for the FX6100 as it seems to be faster the my current X4
It will be faster than X4 if you overclock it to 4.6+ for sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swanie
However, X6 is much faster in single threads and matches the FX8100 series in gaming, sometimes even beating FX8100
Trust me, you will be very happy with the FX6100 regardless of the "Single Thread" crowd!Quote:
Originally Posted by Swanie
Newegg has the 6100 for 159 and the 1090T for the same. The 1090T is a better overall processor, you may want to consider the PII X6 route.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swanie
Thanks for the info but Newegg does not deliver to my country. Locally the 1090T/1100T are more expensive than the FX6100 .I want the chip for gaming. I have a rig on which i can do single threaded apps/ coding etc. This rig will be my gaming rig only.Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
OK i ordered the Fx6100 and should have it tomorrow. I use the UD7 so any help/settings will be appreciated so that i can get this baby to 4.5 to 4.8 mhz
Will be using this cooler:
http://www.thermalright.com/new_a_pa...ver_arrow.html
I will repeat:Quote:
Originally Posted by m411b
"Faster than the X4 (@ 3.8) for sure at 4.6+"
FX8120 loses to 1100T in 3/4 of gaming benchmarks...
Trying to be realistic as this guy wants to play games. Jesus Christ.
@ Swanie -
Is that UD7 rev 1.0 or 1.1? If 1.0 you will have some issues pushing past ~4.2-4.4 with the amount of vdroop
I'll fix this for ya, it's a few troll posts up:
I'm pretty sure I've been talking about nothing BUT gaming, and I don't think "Jesus Christ" has anything to do with this! Real mature.. :shakes:Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
Wow that's funny, do you even own a UD7? For that matter, do you even own an FX6100? If not, why do you continue to troll this thread?Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
I own both and I have no problems pushing past 4.8Ghz WITH the vdroop!
Because I've seen the vdroop the board has and know what others have needed to get to 4.6-4.8 Ghz.Quote:
Originally Posted by m411b
I'm not even trolling. You seem so angry.
The 990FXA-UD7 used in hokiealumnus's review @ Overclockers with an 1100T @ 4.08 Ghz in the board needed 1.52v idle to achieve 1.392v loaded. Is that a GOOD thing to you? Do you really feel okay getting 4.6 Ghz stable out of a measly 1.39v at very unsafe idle voltage? Safe(r) idle values would be 1.475v or less with FX. El Gappo killed a CPU with little more than 1.5v. The 1100T wasn't exactly hogging power.
As far as I know, the 6100's aren't clocking like gold either. Look at gOtVoltage, shoving 1.7v+ into his chip for 5Ghz benchable...
4.4 Ghz is a realistic overclock on a Rev. 1.0 board with an FX6100 and the vdroop issue. At a safe idle value of 1.47v you'd be near 1.35v load...
On top of that, an X6 will do ~4 Ghz on a Rev 1.0 board, and better the FX series in ST. (Really important for gaming as well as SLi and Crossfire scaling!)
Please show me your revision 1.0 board and FX6100 doing 4.8 Ghz stable...then I'll join you on the "good buy" wagon.
Here is a crapload of charts comparing gaming performance: not handpicked, just the gaming part of BD (6100 or 8150) reviews.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/amd-fx...ance-review/10
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...x,3043-18.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...x,3043-19.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...x,3043-20.html
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/t...x8150-tested/8
http://www.techspot.com/review/452-a...us/page10.html
Even 8150 (non OC and OC) vs 1100T (non OC vs OC) in this review:
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Ha...fx-8150/9.html
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Ha...x-8150/10.html
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Ha...x-8150/11.html
Why weren't we just smart and told this guy to keep his quad core?
My intention was not to troll. Look at the gaming results...
Again, I will say:
"Jesus Christ..."
Well i have no idea to be honest but my luck probably 1.0. Will check when i get homeQuote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
Here is good test FX in game resolutions...
http://ht4u.net/reviews/2011/amd_fx_...zer_3d_spiele/
FX 8150 average 3% better than x6 1090T in games and average 3-5% whorse against 2500k.
My CB11.5 @ 5Ghz w/FX6100:
http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/1896/5ghz6100cb115.png
Run 2:
http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/3...6100cb1152.png
This is with everything stock except the CPU, and a 6 month old Windows 7 install that's been BSOD'd 1000 times. Oh, and if you look in the bottom right you will see that my AV is running, and Aero, and everything else!
....sigh...Quote:
Originally Posted by flank3r
XD I laughed really hard when I saw your response :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
Not to mention 1100T is clocked 3% higher than 1090T at stock :P
Swanie, where did you hear that the 8120 eta has moved to early Jan?
My supplier still says 2 Dec.
Rectron PE but LandmarkPC have stock of both the 8120 and 8150 @ R 2600 /R3100
Thanx, they are a little expensive :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Swanie
ETA @ Frontosa is now for today.
Well this Dumbass bought myself the FX6100 and are having a great time playing with it and also great in games. It plays all of them smoother that my X4 965 also at 4.2
Beep, AMD ment for the chip to be clocked higher. They were going for Higher clocks to get performance. It was part of the design. They were actually supose to launch at higher clock speeds. The problem came in Power Consumption. The ghz doesn't bother me, if the FX chips would have launched at 1ghz higher I wouldn't care to compare the clock for clock. The chips design are obviously different.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
Yeah, the process is to blame for some of it...however in no way up to 1 Ghz.Quote:
Originally Posted by charged3800z24
Think about Phenom II X4 when it launched to when it ended. AMD made an improvement of about 300 Mhz through a stepping, and got another 400-500Mhz from the process.
I expect to see chips in Q1/Q2 launch based on B3 with ~4.0 stock with lower power consumption and turbo around 4.6 (some to all cores)...FX-8150 already turbo's to 4.2 Ghz in single thread at stock, still losing to Phenom II @ up to 3.7.
I was talking about stock speeds, not clock per clock. BD @ 4.2 turbo loses to a Phenom II at 3.7 turbo, and at 3.6 Ghz matches Phenom II X6 at 3.3 Ghz in gaming. That chip has 2 extra threads...clocked 300 Mhz higher. (There is a little more OC headroom however.)
I'll run some tests when I get my chip, both at 6/8 threads to compare and simulate the FX-6100. I only bought it for the fun anyway.
All i can say is ,
1st , this is the funnest chip i ever had to this date.
2nd, it clocks like mad .
3rd, on a Ud5 or Ud7 you will need to set your Vcore slightly higher for Vdroop and it will hit 5000mhz with decent cooling.
4th , they can clock 4600mhz with a little over stock volts and be prime stable.
5th , i push mY Voltages Very High so others can see what these chips can take.
6th, I volt the settings high for amusement and to see if it can take it.
7th, it handles all i can dish out in crossfire with variouse card set ups . I even grabbed a Single 6950 to Oc and it games like a charm no matter which way i choose to run it.
UF7G works great 990FXA-UD5.. 1.56v with fsb/htt 270+@ 5000mhz ...before it only liked 250htt and below.
I am glad i did not go the 1100T route seeing how amazing this FXline clocks up.
Benchmarks show how it is in threads vs its older counter part and untill you play around you just cant go by that for something of this nature.
Ive tried a lot of chips in my day, This one is a Wolf in sheepskin once you learn what you can sqeeze out.
I dont care what the Chip loses too in benchmarks, its new tech and will get better. Despite the Over hype,Its another stepping stone for AMD. Taking a chance in a new direction is what brings better things down the road.
The only complaint,
i wish it could unlock into a 8core ,this would be pure sweetness.
UD5 Bios NotE:
F7G Bios,
i can now run it as Single threaded and use Core Disable options. I like how it runs with All cores and Threads enabled and also see no need to run the CPU in Single threaded mode even while gaming. Using all the Cores overclocked is best,Seeing the Bios will just Disable Three of the Six Cores when doing Single threaded on this Mobo. The Chips are actually 3cores with Two thread units per core. So Disabling to single thread cuts three threads or in this case three cores .
Awesome, they are fun to mess with.
I've encountered a weird bug in SiSoft Sandra. When i try and run a bench i immediately (as in like 1 sec) get a BSOD.
I'm thinking it's the software and nothing to do with stability.
Sandra version used is lite 2012 eval.
Well said gOtVoltage... I am enjoying my FX6100 and i know little of OC but are now working my way up, now at 4420mhzQuote:
Originally Posted by gOtVoltage